It's goin' OK, hairy... I just retired last month. I'll be able to come your way at will now... not dependent on how many vacation days I have left!

As for Sky... if they bring back some kind of combination of Varsha, Hobbs, and Matchett, I will be fine with it. If we get an Euro team without an US representation, then not so much... nor do I think that will improve American viewer numbers.

Hobbs used to be interesting and funny. That was back when it seemed as if he showed up drunk after a Saturday night on the town. But that ended decades ago. Hobbs became this very unfunny bitter man. I used to think they could record before the season about five "Hobbs-isms", then just act like a radio DJ and press a button to bring up Hobbs whining about traffic in qualifying or whatever else he used to say every single race.

Varsha was an idiot. Varsha would constantly say things that were not true, but he'd keep saying them if he thought they sounded good. One example was that for a part of one season F1 had a rule where a team had to set a time within 107% or they'd actually be excluded from the race. So, Varsha started saying "before you can race in the xxx grand prix, first you have to qualify" F1 quickly changed the rule as soon as sponsers who'd paid lots of money were in threat of not being in a race. But Varsha kept saying it for years and years and years after it was true. Another season, some races were on the Fox network, and Varsha decided to impress the fans by talking about 'sub-second pit stops'. F1 stops are fast, but they've never become sub-second. But that didn't stop Varsha from saying it all summer.

Matchette could be useful IF he stuck to what he knows. He was a mechanic. So if the broadcast needed to explain what a crew was working on in a shot, he knew what he was seeing. But, Matchette, like many mechanics, things he's really an engineer. But he always sounded like an idiot when he started talking about stuff he knew little about.

The key to this broadcast team was to realize that they were always wrong. If they said X was going to happen, it wasn't. If they said a car was surely about to pit, then the car would stay out. If they said a car would stay out, it would pull into the pits. I remember a Spa race where a bit of rain started to fall just before the stop. Matchette was screaming that the cars must pit, and of course all but one stayed out for the start. One car pitted, and it screwed up their race badly. The funny part was that Matchette in the lead up to the race had explained exactly why the cars shouldn't pit, but in typical Matchette fashion, he completely forgot this when he saw a couple of rain drops on a camera and instantly made the wrong call.

On top of this, they were constantly the Ferrari fan club. They would scream and cheer if a Ferrari made a pass. They would cry and moan if a Ferrari got passed. Hobbs used to say thanks to the Ferrari clubs who'd paid his bar bill in the last couple of weeks, and which ones he's soon be getting to pay his bar bill in the future. Me, I was never a Ferrari fan, so I got really sick and tired of them quickly.

These three did teach me that I could watch a race on mute and that I understood more than enough of what was going on to understand and enjoy the race. A skill that is quite handy considered the very poor quality of racing announcers generally.

I can't stand ESPN. They screw up any sport they broadcast. Whatever stock car guy they pick for these races will be awful, just like their Indy coverage is awful and just like any other race or sport they broadcast these days is awful. I guess they'll find the stock car equivalent of Dick Vitalle to scream into a microphone. But I can't say in the least I'm going to miss the Three Stooges of Motorsport.

The Sky track-side, pre-race team is excellent. However, I could be quite happy if I never heard Crofty ever again. They are of course, very, very, very pro-Hamilton and will never say a bad thing about him nor that he's ever made a mistake. Brundle has hated Vettel with a passion that goes back to when Vettel won championships with Red Bull. But beyond that, Brundle is usually worth listening too.

At times I get to go back and forth between BBC and Sky. With BBC, its Coulthard that can be quite annoying. But their 'voice' guy seems pretty good. Somehow every Tv network seems to think they need a 'voice' guy in the booth who knows nothing about racing but who is a professional announcer. These are usually the people who stink and sound like an idiot. But the BBC guy seems pretty good. I can't think of his name. And maybe that's why he seems pretty good, if he's more focused on the racing than on self-promotion and giving out his hashtag to people know how to contact him.

That BBC Voice guy and Brundle would be my best announcer pairing from what I get to hear of English language F1 broadcasters.

Varsha was an idiot. Varsha would constantly say things that were not true, but he'd keep saying them if he thought they sounded good. One example was that for a part of one season F1 had a rule where a team had to set a time within 107% or they'd actually be excluded from the race. So, Varsha started saying "before you can race in the xxx grand prix, first you have to qualify" F1 quickly changed the rule as soon as sponsers who'd paid lots of money were in threat of not being in a race. But Varsha kept saying it for years and years and years after it was true.

Just picking this out of your stream of general negativity, but it's pretty ironic for you to criticize Varsha as an idiot who doesn't know what he's talking about and then claim the 107% rule isn't still in force.

Varsha was an idiot. Varsha would constantly say things that were not true, but he'd keep saying them if he thought they sounded good. One example was that for a part of one season F1 had a rule where a team had to set a time within 107% or they'd actually be excluded from the race. So, Varsha started saying "before you can race in the xxx grand prix, first you have to qualify" F1 quickly changed the rule as soon as sponsers who'd paid lots of money were in threat of not being in a race. But Varsha kept saying it for years and years and years after it was true.

Just picking this out of your stream of general negativity, but it's pretty ironic for you to criticize Varsha as an idiot who doesn't know what he's talking about and then claim the 107% rule isn't still in force.

Me too, right up until February 18th, 2001 - the day Dale died, I have never watched another NASCAR race since and here's my reason why......

Instead of being honest with NASCAR racing fans, the powers that be in NASCAR decided to blame of all persons "Bill Simpson" and Simpson racing products - and as a result Bill Simpson retired as head of the company bearing his name.

IMHO - castigating the man that did more for safety and the protection of drivers in all forms of motor-racing than anyone to date.

Dale made up his own rules regarding the driver's seat and safety products in his racing car, (and NASCAR let him). NOBODY BUT DALE EARNHARDT TOUCHED HIS "SEAT" OR HIS "SEAT-BELTS".

Every season NASCAR mandated "new" seat-belts be installed in the NASCAR racing car - but Dale refused to install them in "his" car until they had first been washed in a commercial washer more than 50 times - for new belts are quite stiff and they "chaffed" his shoulders and "he" didn't like that.

Every season NASCAR gave out the specs on how these new seat-belts were to be installed on and around the driver's racing seat - and every year Dale ignored them. The distance from the seat anchor point to the over-the-shoulder "belt-anchor" point was set in the rules at no more than 18", but again Dale did not like that rule, 'cus again he said it "chaffed" his shoulders....., the over-the-shoulder seat-belt anchor point in Dale's car were over 24" (28" IIRC) from the seat anchor points - and again NASCAR's unwillingness to make Dale abide by the rules (against Bill Simpson's own admonishment both to Dale personally and to NASCAR year after year), fell on deaf ears.

Every season NASCAR gave out new "seat" specs and how they must be anchored in the cars and how the "belts" were to be configured in, on and through that racing seat - and every year Dale ignored them. The rules clearly stated that the "crotch" strap was to be routed through the slot for it in the racing seat, BUT Dale didn't like the way it chaffed his testicles, so "his" crotch strap was never in the "slot" but around the front of his seat. I guess it gave his big ones more breathing room and to heck with preventing the submarining/sliding forward in the racing seat in the event of a crash.

Every season Bill Simpson, personally and on his own reconnaissance, examined all NASCAR race car drivers installation of Simpson Racing equipment and made suggestions both to drivers and NASCAR - and to Dale personally about the manner in which "he" specifically violated the rules on "seat-belt" use in the 3 car - and he was ignored by both Dale, who just laughed and NASCAR.

There is much that could be mentioned here regarding Dale's disdain of the full faced helmet and the H.A.N.S. device, but the fact of the matter is that one of Dale's over-the-shoulder, over-washed and improperly anchored seat-belts broke when he contacted the wall head-on in the 2001 Daytona 500.

1. Dale intentionally wrecked Sterling Marlin in turn 4 on the last lap of the 2001 Daytona 500 - in order to assure that either "HIS" car, driven by Michael Waltrip or "HIS" son would be the winner of that particular Daytona 500.

2. When Dale hit the wall he had the biggest $&^#-eating grin on his face knowing full well his intention #1 above was going to be successful.

.....they didn't call him "IRONHEAD" for nuthin.........., and NASCAR died for me the day they blamed a man that did more for the safety and protection of any motorsport drivers the world-over - ALL BECAUSE THE POWERS THAT BE IN NASCAR COULDN'T BEAR TO BE HONEST AND TELL FANS THE TRUTH.

....., I'm surprised Ironhead didn't come back from the dead and punch 'em all in the teeth for the "blame" that NASCAR tossed on the shoulders of Bill Simpson, who didn't deserve one iota of it and tried time and time again dauntlessly to warn Dale he was risking his life, by the choices Dale Earnhardt, himself made with the "approval" of NASCAR because of his status in the sport.......

It's goin' OK, hairy... I just retired last month. I'll be able to come your way at will now... not dependent on how many vacation days I have left!

As for Sky... if they bring back some kind of combination of Varsha, Hobbs, and Matchett, I will be fine with it. If we get an Euro team without an US representation, then not so much... nor do I think that will improve American viewer numbers.

Totally disagree. Just getting the Sky feed would be the most dramatic improvement to US coverage in decades. We have had an outsider's perspective to the F1 circus for a long time now. We need to finally get back in the room. Basically Varsha, Hobbs, Matchett and Duffy are mostly just guys who watch F1 these days. They no longer have the connections to the people who are currently involved and so they do not provide the level of coverage that a real insider can. When you look at the difference between the level of access that Sky seem to have vs. what we have, there is no comparison.

Of course you woild like it, sandman, as i frequently read about the Sky Hamilton lovefest. To me this is just a ESPN/Disney cheap move. I do not believe that the US is totally void of people who could do at least one of the roles.

Of course you woild like it, sandman, as i frequently read about the Sky Hamilton lovefest. To me this is just a ESPN/Disney cheap move. I do not believe that the US is totally void of people who could do at least one of the roles.

Ignoring the idea that this is just a stopgap measure for 2 years before Liberty go down the streaming subscription route (something I fully expect them to do, hence doing this little deal for as little hassle and as cheap as possible), I genuinely wonder what US guys you have earmarked who could do a better job than the Sky lot? Access wise, outside of Lauda over on RTL and Coulthard on C4, I honestly doubt any American commentator/ex racer has the same contact book/up to date info as anything that Sky have on offer, nor do I think they have an active commentator who could draw on relevant knowledge the way a Coulthard could (less so Brundle, but he has his fingers in many pies. The less said about Croft the better) or even Webber on C4/Chandok/Davidson do for Sky.

I get the hate for the supposed Hamilton love-in, but its no worse than what the BBC were peddling when Red Bull were clearing house while DC was on the roster, and surely even the crappier bits of pre/post show coverage are better than a tape delayed race and *inaudible* all else?

Of course you woild like it, sandman, as i frequently read about the Sky Hamilton lovefest. To me this is just a ESPN/Disney cheap move. I do not believe that the US is totally void of people who could do at least one of the roles.

what do you mean by "better coverage" from sky ? don't they all use the same feed ? thanks

They use the same feed for the race, but the race commentary (yes even with Crofty) is better imho. Where Sky really separates themselves from the rest though is in their extensive pre- and post-session coverage throughout the weekend. I hope we have access to all of that as well, at least through the OTT streaming.

+ what sandman said right after your post.

_________________On Twitter, follow me @GPAmericas for all the latest breaking news and current photos...

Last edited by hairy_scotsman on Thu Feb 15, 2018 9:45 am, edited 1 time in total.

Of course you woild like it, sandman, as i frequently read about the Sky Hamilton lovefest. To me this is just a ESPN/Disney cheap move. I do not believe that the US is totally void of people who could do at least one of the roles.

Ignoring the idea that this is just a stopgap measure for 2 years before Liberty go down the streaming subscription route (something I fully expect them to do, hence doing this little deal for as little hassle and as cheap as possible), I genuinely wonder what US guys you have earmarked who could do a better job than the Sky lot? Access wise, outside of Lauda over on RTL and Coulthard on C4, I honestly doubt any American commentator/ex racer has the same contact book/up to date info as anything that Sky have on offer, nor do I think they have an active commentator who could draw on relevant knowledge the way a Coulthard could (less so Brundle, but he has his fingers in many pies. The less said about Croft the better) or even Webber on C4/Chandok/Davidson do for Sky.

I get the hate for the supposed Hamilton love-in, but its no worse than what the BBC were peddling when Red Bull were clearing house while DC was on the roster, and surely even the crappier bits of pre/post show coverage are better than a tape delayed race and *inaudible* all else?

Yeah I get it too, but really imho Sky isn't much more Lewis-centric than NBC was, esp when you consider they're his home country's broadcast team. The NBC crew talked up Lewis at every opportunity, too. Can you imagine what our coverage would be like with a well-known American in a top seat and American announcers? We'd be lucky to get news about anyone else on the grid.

_________________On Twitter, follow me @GPAmericas for all the latest breaking news and current photos...

Last edited by hairy_scotsman on Thu Feb 15, 2018 11:01 am, edited 2 times in total.

I just dont think that shoving the "hometown" favorite down our throats is the best way to win US viewrs if SKY is as biased as I have read about on this forum

I've had SKY (sadly no more) and, even though they do sometimes go overboard on the Hamilton love, they're still streets ahead of anything else I've seen. Their production is generally pretty slick and the commentators are fairly knowledgeable. All the people involved clearly love F1. The other channels I've seen in Europe just can't compete on any level. I'd take it back in a heartbeat if I could.

There is bias, but I'm pretty sure every commentator has some form of bias (in the Netherlands, for example, Verstappen can do no wrong, which can be annoying when it's plain to see he's been at fault for something). Once you get past that the overall quality is quite high and I think viewers anywhere could do a lot worse. I would guess that it wouldn't be non-American presenters that would put off most U.S. audiences, but rather a lack of (front running) U.S. drivers. Generally speaking, of course. If those were present, then I'm sure it would help attract bigger audiences, regardless of who was presenting

When Jimmy Clark was the fresh face competing at the Indy 500, there was a Love-Fest around him...When Jackie Stewart was the Flying Scot of F1, there was a Love-Fest around him...When James Hunt was the dashing British darling of F1, there was a Love-Fest around him...When Nikki Lauda was the comeback kid of F1, there was a Love-Fest around him...When Ayrton Senna was the Hot-blooded Brazilian of F1, there was a Love-Fest around him...When Michael Schumacher strove to be 7-time Champ of F1, there was a Love-Fest around him...When Sebastian Vettel was the emergent German darling of F1 in that "new team", there was a Love-Fest around him...

So, when Hamilton is on a roll, why should there be anything different about him? With the Fox Sports commentators, there seemed to be a balanced opinion between an elderly statesman who commanded consummate respect (Hobbs) and the technical expert (Machett). American audiences will need to become accustomed to the new crew. Familiarity with the names of ex-drivers will help, but if a love fest for the best driver (Hamilton) emerges, it will not be a surprise.

_________________Short-time member, Life-Long Fan from 1965 -- More than 550 Grand Prix recorded since 1982 (all but 3), and counting...

Last edited by MB-BOB on Thu Feb 15, 2018 1:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Best? I'd say one of the 2 or 3 best, but not "the best driver". He's the best driver currently in a car capable of a championship, to be certain.

Opinions vary... Hamilton and Rosberg had competed against each other for many years, and Hamilton always came out on top. When Hamilton's car failed in Malaysia and Rosberg squeaked by to win the 2016 championship. his decision to retire was obvious... he had not a tinker's chance in creation of repeating. That speaks to Hamilton's dominance as a driver in equal cars.

Not speaking about driving ability, but rather media perception... Vettel's red mist in Baku (unfortunately) paints him as a petulent, self-entitled ex WDC... yesterday's news. And Alonso's arrogant demeanor and temper tantrums in the face of bad choices in teams paint him equally. Verstappen may be the next wunder-kind of F1, but he needs to prove he can finish races like Ricciardo does.

Until then, the media always like a winner. Until Hamilton makes similar mistakes, the media will likely continue it's "love-fest" with him.

Let the arm-chair arguments begin...

_________________Short-time member, Life-Long Fan from 1965 -- More than 550 Grand Prix recorded since 1982 (all but 3), and counting...

Not off topic at all in terms of media. I don't agree with this, but here in the US, sporting media have the silly habit of pitting "good guys" against "bad guys." In boxing and wrestling, there's always a good guy and a bad guy (people with a minimal dark side).

In American NASCAR racing, there are always some drivers put forward as troublemakers vs goody-two-shoes heroes. For the reasons previously noted, Vettel and Alonso are (currently) pitched by the media as the darksiders, while Hamilton is pitched as the achieving underdog. These are fluid situations, subject to change as events unfold. So current troublemakers can eventually become heroes, and vice-versa. So let's not get our knickers in a knot...

I worked in the media for several years. You can't convince me that in Europe the media treat all drivers equally, and objectively. Italian media always treat Ferrari drivers ahead of others, and the German media could never find anything negative to say about Schumacher, or Vettel.

Point is, that here in America, we F1 fans will need to get used to European-bent coverage. That will be an adjustment from the American-ized coverage we've seen for several years, something that possibly only Americans will understand.

_________________Short-time member, Life-Long Fan from 1965 -- More than 550 Grand Prix recorded since 1982 (all but 3), and counting...

Not off topic at all in terms of media. I don't agree with this, but here in the US, sporting media have the silly habit of pitting "good guys" against "bad guys." In boxing and wrestling, there's always a good guy and a bad guy (people with a minimal dark side).

In American NASCAR racing, there are always some drivers put forward as troublemakers vs goody-two-shoes heroes. For the reasons previously noted, Vettel and Alonso are (currently) pitched by the media as the darksiders, while Hamilton is pitched as the achieving underdog. These are fluid situations, subject to change as events unfold. So current troublemakers can eventually become heroes, and vice-versa. So let's not get our knickers in a knot...

I worked in the media for several years. You can't convince me that in Europe the media treat all drivers equally, and objectively. Italian media always treat Ferrari drivers ahead of others, and the German media could never find anything negative to say about Schumacher, or Vettel.

Point is, that here in America, we F1 fans will need to get used to European-bent coverage. That will be an adjustment from the American-ized coverage we've seen for several years, something that possibly only Americans will understand.

Schumacher has taken a lot of flak, in Germany they used to call him "Schummel Schumi". In Italy he was criticised even the day he won their first WDC in 20+ years; as he was conducting with his hands during the Italian anthem and they took it the wrong way, that he was being disrespectful.

In Britain it is even worse. The media here loves to shoot down their heroes.

what do you mean by "better coverage" from sky ? don't they all use the same feed ? thanks

They use the same feed for the race, but the race commentary (yes even with Crofty) is better imho. Where Sky really separates themselves from the rest though is in their extensive pre- and post-session coverage throughout the weekend. I hope we have access to all of that as well, at least through the OTT streaming.

+ what sandman said right after your post.

ok, that makes sense. hope we will get some pre and post race stuff, because they have not said anything about that yet

Last edited by pc27b on Thu Feb 15, 2018 9:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I think we will get great coverage from the UK based broadcast team. I have been lucky to watch these guys in action many times last year in London and also in Canada. My fear is the constant TV Commercials in the USA. if we are lucky to have no breaks as in UK or limited breaks in Canada then this will be a success. I think Steve Matchett was awesome and its our loss he won't be broadcasting F1 in the US. Overall let's wait and see if this is as bad as NBCN was (commercials were every 6 minutes it sucked)

_________________One.The best song ever written....thanks BonoI am the Number 1Tifosi

I can already get the Australia broadcast pulled up on my on screen guide with Direct TV, looks like ESPN is doing FP1, and ESPN 2 is doing qually and the race, no mention of cast or who will be doing the broadcasting yet. At least I can program my DVR accordingly now.